Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

STATE v. BROWN, 78527-3-I. (2019)

Court: Court of Appeals of Washington Number: inwaco20190716g56 Visitors: 16
Filed: Jul. 15, 2019
Latest Update: Jul. 15, 2019
Summary: UNPUBLISHED OPINION PER CURIAM . Fabian Brown appeals his conviction for theft of a motor vehicle, arguing that the trial court failed to enter written findings and conclusions as required by CrR 3.5 and that we must remand for their entry. But the trial court belatedly entered the findings and conclusions, and Brown has not alleged any prejudice from their delayed entry despite the opportunity to do so in a reply brief. Accordingly, a remand is unnecessary. State v. Cannon , 130 Wn.2d 313
More

UNPUBLISHED OPINION

Fabian Brown appeals his conviction for theft of a motor vehicle, arguing that the trial court failed to enter written findings and conclusions as required by CrR 3.5 and that we must remand for their entry. But the trial court belatedly entered the findings and conclusions, and Brown has not alleged any prejudice from their delayed entry despite the opportunity to do so in a reply brief. Accordingly, a remand is unnecessary. State v. Cannon, 130 Wn.2d 313, 329, 922 P.2d 1293 (1996) ("Although the practice of submitting late findings and conclusions is disfavored, they may be `submitted and entered even while an appeal is pending' if the defendant is not prejudiced by the belated entry of findings." (quoting State v. McGary, 37 Wn.App. 856, 861, 683 P.2d 1125 (1984)); State v. Gaddy, 114 Wn.App. 702, 705, 60 P.3d 116 (2002), aff'd, 152 Wn.2d 64, 93 P.3d 872 (2004).

Affirmed.

LEACH, SMITH and VERELLEN, JJ., concurs.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer